Your totally awesome Facebook Fan Page is all set up and populated with exclusive behind-the-scenes content – you can almost taste the engagement. …except the fans are nowhere to be found. (side note: “build it and they will come” is one of the greatest lies ever told).

So what now? How do you reel ‘em in? Why with a contest of course! Just pick up a few iPod Nanos to use as prizes (who doesn’t love those things?!) and lay out your conditions for entry… all you must do is become a fan, write on our wall, post a discussion topic, upload a fan photo, tag yourself in said photo, ‘like’ our status update and then tell all your friends about it! Then you can just sit back and watch the fans flock to your page.

Not so fast… while this may have been a quick fix in the past, Facebook tightened the reins on contests with the updated Promotion Guidelines released late last year. Three months later, I’m still seeing heaps of renegade Facebook Pages out there, running their illegal contests, with no regard for the laws of the land. So, I thought some cliff notes might be handy.

What does it include?

The guidelines govern the administration and publicising of promotions, contests, competitions, sweepstakes, ‘games of skill’, ‘games of chance’, lotteries (anything where someone gets something for free) on the Facebook platform. (side note: for simplicity’s sake I’m using the generic term ‘contest’ to refer to any of the above from here on out).

What is meant by ‘publicising’ a contest?

‘Publicising’ a contest on Facebook means using any part of the platform to talk about it (regardless of where the user actually enters the contest).

You would probably use things status updates, Facebook ads, wall posts, events, static FBML (custom content), fan updates (private messaging) to do this.

What is meant by ‘administering’ a contest?

‘Administering’ a contest on Facebook means using any part of the platform in the actual execution of the contest.

This includes entry collection, judging/winner selection and winner notification.

3 important rules to consider:

1. You cannot administer a promotion that users automatically enter by becoming a fan of your Page.

• You cannot make the act of fanning your Page the means by which users are entered; that is, anything along the lines of “become a fan of our Facebook Page and you’ll automatically be entered to win…” is prohibited.
• However, you could condition entry on the user becoming a fan if done via a 3rd party application (i.e. the user must become a fan as a step in the application’s entry process).

2. You cannot require a user to do something on the Facebook platform to enter the contest.

• This means you cannot condition entry on a user performing actions such as commenting, posting status updates, ‘liking’, uploading photos, changing one’s profile image, RSVPing for events.
• But you could condition entry on the user providing content if done via a 3rd party application (i.e. require the user to upload a photo to your 3rd party app but not directly to your Facebook Wall or photo album).

3. You can’t use the Facebook platform to notify winners.

• This means you cannot use any of Facebook’s inbuilt communication tools like messages, chat, status updates and wall posts to contact winners.
• But, if you were to use one of those 3rd party applications I keep mentioning, you could put in a field that requires users to provide a contact email address or phone number where they can be reached if they win.

4. You must get approval for any contest you wish to administer on Facebook.

• You cannot administer any contest on Facebook unless you’ve gotten the OK from your account rep. Speaking from personal experience, Facebook reps are usually pretty unresponsive unless they think there’s $ involved (we’re talking like >$10k ) – think about (or perhaps feign interest in) taking out some ads.
• However, you can publicise a contest without obtaining Facebook’s written consent.

Disclaimer: The rules outlined above are accurate at the time of posting, but it’s Facebook… they love changing things up without notice. In addition, whilst this post addresses some of the more common violations, it is by no means an exhaustive guide to administering or publicising contests on Facebook. Be sure to read the Promotion Guidelines in their entirety before initiating any promotions on the Facebook platform.

Slideshow of what you can and can’t do with promotions on Facebook:

OK so this is a tad self promotional but there’s something in it for you so don’t be too quick to judge. I will be presenting at this year’s Sydney ad:tech and if, despite this announcement, you were still thinking of attending (16th and 17th March) then drop me a line (marc@thinqdigital.com.au) as I can send you a code that scores 20% off your ticket(s). Here endeth the promotion.

"...Mum’s no fool and she’d never shell out more money for less milk."

It’s generally accepted that a litre of milk gets more expensive every year, an unfortunate economic reality we call inflation. But can you imagine how angry mum would be if an additional $0.10 in price was inversely matched by a 50ml reduction in volume? This is all hypothetical of course because mum’s no fool and she’d never shell out more money for less milk.

But this is exactly what’s happening in the world television and press advertising. Less milk (audience) is starting to cost advertisers more money.

A recent article by Lara Sinclair in The Australian claims TV advertising rates have risen 63% since the year 2000. A further rate rise of 10% is being sought by some networks this year despite a 5% decline in audience numbers across the 3 major free-to-air networks.

And it’s not just TV faction wanting more for less; the inky finger folks are also in on the act. The latest Audit Bureau of Circulation report paints a sorry looking picture for press media with national newspaper circulation down 2.28% for the 12 months to December 2009. The main contributors being The Australian Financial Review (-10.08%),  The Australian (-4.2%), The West Australian (-2.69% Sat/-2.46% weekly) and The Daily Telegraph (-2.66%). With these kind of audience drops you’d think it would be embarrassing to ask for more money. Not so, a 3-5% annual rate increase is par for the course in the world of press advertising.

But asking press and TV media buyers to pay more money for less product maybe starting to wear thin.

The latest Internet Advertising Bureau’s numbers certainly suggest so. Another year of growth for internet advertising revenues, up 9% (2009 compared to 2008) clocking $513m for the 3 months ending December 2009, the largest fourth quarter result in the industries history. Where did this 9% come from? Certainly not from an overall increase in all media advertising spend, remember last year? It was horrible. The growth in online most certainly came at the expense of press and to a lesser extent TV.

There is no doubt that this growth in online media is partly due to the shift in media consumption habits; but there’s another force at play here, it’s called the online media revenue model. Put simply, it operates more fairly. The online media industry will never charge you more money for less milk. In fact many publishers won’t even sell it by the litre – hey you might not want a whole litre this week. “That sounds fair”, says mum. “They only charge me for the milk I drink, maybe I should shop there more often”.

Traditional media channels, particularly press, will continue to lose ground to online media (trust me on this one) but how long will it take before online media surpasses press in Australia? Paul Fisher, CEO of the IAB seems to think this will happen as early as 2013. Usually I find these predictions by the IAB too keen, the result of the youngest media channel getting a overly excited by some good early results, but this time I tend to agree. By 2013, press and TV buyers will have seen three years of increasing rates and reducing audience numbers.

Mum will have had just about enough by then don’t you think?

Facebook began six years ago today as a product that my roommates and I built to help people around us connect easily, share information and understand one another better. We hoped Facebook would improve people’s lives in important ways. So it’s rewarding to see that as Facebook has grown, people around the world are using the service to share information about events big and small and to stay connected to everyone they care about.

- Mark Zuckerberg: "Six Years of Making Connections"

I could still feel the warm fuzzies from Zuckerberg’s note when I logged into Facebook and the top post in my newsfeed crapped all over my kumbaya – “I’ve had the new facebook layout for all of 45 minutes and already my fb chat reliability has gone down 90%. F*&$ you Facebook.”

Ah bless, the resistance has begun. But it’s really no surprise; it’s been a tumultuous relationship over the past 6 years…

September 2006 – The News Feed
The News Feed feature was introduced to help users filter through the noise to see the newest, most relevant actions and updates from their friends. However, users felt as though their dirty laundry was being broadcast without their permission and immediately formed groups and petitions in protest.

Response: Zuckerberg posted an open letter on the Facebook blog that began, “We really messed this one up….”

November 2007 – Beacon
Beacon, Facebook’s new social ad system tracked users’ activities, registration and purchases on partner websites and published them to their profiles. Once again feeling as though their privacy had been compromised, users were furious and MoveOn.org, an advocacy group, started a full-scale campaign against Beacon. Facebook and a number of Beacon affiliates were later named in class-action lawsuits over the ordeal.

Response: Zuckerberg again apologised, saying “We’ve made a lot of mistakes building this feature, but we’ve made even more with how we’ve handled them. We simply did a bad job with this release, and I apologize for it.”

September 2008 – The Profile Redesign
Almost 2 million angry and confused Facebookers joined groups and signed petitions when all users were forced to adopt the redesign, which changed the layout of personal Profiles from a box-like structure to the Wall and tabs structure. Common complaints were that it was more difficult to find profile information and add photos and looked ‘too much like MySpace.’

Response: Zuckerberg’s initial response was a blog post thanking everyone for their patience and support throughout the evolution, but it did little to placate angry users. The following day Facebook added Pirate to the site’s language translations (in honour of International Talk Like A Pirate Day) – for a few brief moments, all was forgotten.

February 2009 – Terms of Service
Facebook didn’t tell anyone when they changed the ToS to retain “irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license” even after content is deleted. This made users mad.

Response: Over several posts Facebook tried to clarify that users do own and control their own content. Shortly after, the ‘Terms of Service’ was canned in lieu of the more democratic sounding ‘Statement of Rights and Responsibilities’.

A TechCrunch Post on Facebook's Poll: 94% Of Users Don't Like Redesign

March 2009 – Pages Redesign; Homepage Redesign (Stream + Publisher + Filters)
Brands that had invested in design and creative probably weren’t happy when the layout of Pages suddenly changed to mirror Profiles’ tabbed design, but corporate protocol didn’t allow them to throw much of a stink.

Users on the other hand were vocal about their dislike of the homepage redesign and the disappearance of the iconic “Kristen is … ” prefix for status updates. They created groups and posted angry comments – a handful of the more salient ones were chronicled by the NYTimes Gadgetwise Blog:

• “I hate the ’share’ button. It’s so California.”
• “The images in the status feeds have rounded edges.”
• “Your OWN pic appears every time you post an article on your wall.”

December 2009: Privacy Controls
When Facebook adjusted privacy controls, it first appeared to be done in users’ best interest. However, savvy users were skeptical – and for good reason – as the default on some personal information was viewable by everyone. But this backlash spanned beyond the usual outcropping of harsh words, petitions and Facebook groups – this time the U.S. Federal Trade Commission was summoned.

Response: Facebook changed a few things in response to complaints; Zuckerberg set out to show the Internets that it’s okay to share things about yourself by sharing some of himself with us…

He’s a fan of Taylor Swift and proud of it.

One time he and the gf had a lightsaber duel in the office!

And you know what, even the youngest self-made billionaire needs a tender moment with his teddy bear every now and again.

February 2010 – Present Day
Facebook turned 6 and got another facelift; users are predictably angry.

So what can we take away from examining the trials and tribulations of our 6 year relationship? A few of my observations:

Facebook has and will continue to tread through new territory in terms of privacy, data collection and revenue models for a community of over 400 million people. They will misstep and make mistakes. They might not always have our best interests at heart, but they certainly don’t want to seriously piss anyone off… or get sued.

Facebook users are incredibly irritable and averse to change. We generally can’t identify what we want, but we sure know it when given something we don’t want (although we then sometimes later learn that we actually did want it but didn’t even realise.) This probably won’t improve as seniors and baby boomers continue to join Facebook at an alarming rate.

And with all that said, I think it’s time to pour myself a drink. Cheers to you, Zuck, it’s been quite a ride.

Wowza, Facebook just turned 6! That’s really old. It’s even older in the sense of social network years (whose ratio to calendar years must be something like 11:1). And, like any good cougar vying for young’uns, it celebrated the big day with a face lift to its homepage.

My account rolled over to the new homepage today; it’s all about navigation and accessibility this time around:

• The left column menu has been souped-up into what Facebook refers to as a ‘dashboard’ which makes it much easier for users to find and access content, applications, pages and groups. (You may recall that in the last iteration this was accessed via a menu hidden in the far left side of the bottom toolbar.)
• The global navigation puts a more prominent emphasis on notifications, new friend requests and messages. (But, you mightn’t notice this unless there’s something new for you to see, in which case the button is highlighted). The search input box is huge! …And sits front and centre.

The last redesign was all about the stream; as Facebook’s response to Twitter, it highlighted the latest content in real-time. However, there was major backlash (weird, that never happens) with the main gripes being clutter and lack of user-friendliness.

This latest layout seems to be more in line with traditional web design… could it be that 6 years of wisdom has taught Facebook to put more thought into good old fashioned usability than looking slick? A logical idea considering that baby boomers and seniors are Facebook’s fastest growing segments.

[...I guess that means I should probably take back the whole “vying for young’uns” part.]

Here at Thinq we like to plan for the person using the device, rather than for the device itself – devices such as the recently released (to unprecedented anticipation) Apple iPad. But here I get stuck…. Just who will use the iPad?

The early adopting gadget addict? Let’s call him Michael. Sure, he’ll probably want it, may even line up to buy it, but I predict the iPad’s shininess will rub off quickly…..  The inability to multi-task applications will drive him mad (what, I can’t check my emails and watch a movie at the same time? Or listen to Pandora and surf the web?). I can hear his scoffs now.

How about Gary, an on-the-go businessman? He wants to impress potential clients with slick presentations on a lightweight device – the iPad will certainly do that. But will he have time to figure out how to use Keynote, the only presentation software the iPad will support? And does he really need another device (he’s already got a laptop, desktop computer, and iPhone). More importantly, will his IT department buy it for him?

Then there’s Cary, a uni student sick of lugging stacks of text books around. She loves the iPad her Dad bought her. It holds all her textbooks, she can research on the web between classes and take notes with it during lectures. But the 10 hr battery life means she keeps getting caught out in class with a dead iPad because she forgot to charge it overnight. And although the LCD screen looks pretty (much prettier than the e-Ink based Kindle), she can’t see it in the sunny courtyard between classes. And whilst the iPad’s price tag is low, I’m not sure it’s low enough for a student budget if Daddy doesn’t cough up the dough.

Which leaves Helen, an avid book reader. Her favourite room in the house is the study, which is packed with books she’s collected over the years. She hasn’t bought a Kindle yet because she thinks it looks and feels “clunky” and loses the romanticism of reading a real book. But the cheaper prices from the iBooks online store, and the iPad interface have convinced her it’s time to jump into the eReader market (even if she does have a giggle every time she sees the name iPad).  Then she discovers that Random House, the world’s biggest publisher, isn’t supported by iBooks…

So who will buy the iPad (aside from Pee-wee)? Well, I’m not sure droves of people will. But then whilst there are some big gaps in expected functionality (tough crowd), it’s bound to revolutionise the way we consume media.

When you think about it, the original iPod simply stored and played music. The iPad already does a lot more than just store books. It stores and plays music and movies, stores your photo albums and provides an unprecedented large screen, touch based web browsing experience. And that’s just the native applications – what apps are developers the world over dreaming up for the iPad right now? So it’s already leaps ahead of where the original iPod was, and look how that’s shaped mobile communications.

But what about you, would you buy it? And if so, how would you use it?

Ham? Maybe.

Wine? Quite possibly.

Limited strenuous exercise? Almost certainly.

There are a number of reasons why my fingers might feel fatter in 2010, that’s “twenty ten”  people, not “two thousand and ten”. Stop wasting good syllables. A problem shared is a problem halved, so I decided to discuss my condition with a few close friends. Turns out a number of the folks I surveyed were also suffering from podgy digit disorder. After much contemplation we uncovered a common factor in the way we all behaved over the Christmas holidays.

We had all spent more time playing with our iPhones. From DoodleJump to Tweetie we’d all been tapping, swiping and pinching far more than your average working week and it was starting to have physical effects. Or so we thought. Why else would we be tapping a back link when we were trying to hit the search field?

Leave enough space between action taps - One of Bill's "8 Rules of Thumb" (source: How People really use the iPhone - Bill Westerman)

It wasn’t until I stumbled across Bill Westerman’s presentation – How People Really Use the iPhone that I started to think maybe it wasn’t me. Maybe it was my phone, or more specifically the application’s user interface design. Maybe all of my additional holiday usage was starting to uncover flaws in the way some iPhone apps were designed. Turns out Bill’s study uncovered a number of common usability issues experienced by people when trying to navigate a series of common apps.

These common issues have formed Bill’s “8 rules of thumb” a great checklist for iPhone application planners and developers.  Just as no serious web project would be undertaken without a strong planning, prototyping and testing cycle neither should the brave new world of phone based application development.

foursquare is a cross between a friend-finder, a social city-guide and a game that rewards you for doing interesting things.

Yesterday was a good day – it was inadvertently brought to my attention that foursquare is finally available in Perth! And, it comes only a couple of months after its Australian debut in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

Here’s how it works:
Using a mobile app, mobile web or SMS (US only), users voluntarily check-in at a variety of locations – cafes, stores, bars, parks – and in doing so alert friends of their whereabouts… perfect if they’re in the area and keen to drop in to say hello. It’s also possible to check-in and keep the location private – designed for those times when three’s a crowd.

When checking-in, users can share tips (i.e. try the frites at Little Creatures!) and add activities to personal to-do lists. Check-ins earn points; there are extra points awarded for going to new places and the user who has checked-in most at a given location becomes the “Mayor”. Users can also unlock badges by checking in at interesting places… it’s a competition to explore your city!

Player Please! - a badge that is unlocked by checking-in with 3 members of the opposite sex.

I first became hooked on foursquare while living in NYC and I would rank it amongst my favorite iPhone apps. Why? Because it satisfies every reason I’d ever use an app:

Utility: 1, it enables you to locate people and places, and 2, it offers user recommendations/tips for various locations

Communication: the app obviously facilitates lateral communication and also has Facebook and Twitter integration

Competition: don’t forget that this is also a game – you’re competing to check-in at the most places and unlock badges by doing unusual things (you don’t know how to unlock badges until you’ve unlocked them)

Social networking: the community aspect ties it all together – the tips that pop-up alongside venues are from your friends (*ahem, word-of-mouth from a trusted source), you’re able to catch up with your friends, you’re in competition with your friends.

And then there’s foursquare for Businesses, which gives retailers an opportunity to alert users of promotions when they’re in the area.. imagine checking-in at Starbucks and immediately getting a notification that the Dome just across the road is offering 2 for 1 coffees! In addition to this, many retailers offer special discounts to their establishment’s current Mayor – which effectively rewards the best customers and creates an incentive for other patrons to frequent.

Charities are also seeing benefit in foursquare. Last month Pepsi sponsored a campaign which dedicated 4 cents for every NYC check-in to CampInteractive, an organization that aims to inspire inner-city youth through technology.

This is clearly no playground game we’re dealing with here.

If you’ve been on Wikipedia in the last few weeks (which you likely have), you might’ve seen the thank you note from founder Jimmy Wales:

Wow. What can I say? Thank you.

We’ve just ended the most successful fundraiser in our history, $7.5 million USD raised in less than 8 weeks.

Incredible. But I’m not surprised.

In 2001, I took a bet on people, and you’ve never let me down.

You have created the largest collection of human knowledge ever assembled: 14 million encyclopedia articles in 270 languages, still growing and getting better every day. You have supported, funded and protected it…

I’m not ashamed to admit that I frequently use Wikipedia to find information on everything from trivial tidbits to abstract theories. What I do find shameful, is the fact that after years of using Wikipedia, this week was the first time I ever made a donation and offered something back.

Wikipedia spawned from Nupedia, a free online encyclopedia created by Wales and philosopher Lawrence Sanger, which failed because of it’s languid pace (in the first six months only 2 articles made it through the process). Currency is precisely the reason that Wikipedia continues to triumph over traditional static encyclopedias; these days even real-time isn’t fast enough.

However, it isn’t its speed but rather its ability to demonstrate the power of community that makes Wikipedia one of the greatest innovations of the 2000s. Communication, collaboration and self-policing has enabled us, the community, to gather and maintain the world’s knowledge (proof that knowledge is, after all, human constructed).

So.. thank you, Jimmy Wales. And the same goes to you that have contributed to any of the site’s 14 million articles in 270 languages, to you that challenge what you read and help keep it accurate, and to you that donate to the cause.

Donate to Wikipedia

*Wikipedia was used 3 times in the writing of this post.

All Australians are free, within the bounds of the law, to say or write what they think about Australian governments or about any other subject or social issue as long as they do not endanger people, make false allegations or obstruct the free speech of others. The same applies to Australian newspapers, radio and television and other forms of media. Australians are free to protest the actions of government and to campaign to change laws.

- an excerpt from Life in Australia

When I migrated to Australia a few months back, Immigration provided me with Life in Australia, a 46 page booklet outlining the core values (including the one listed above) that ensure that Australia maintains its high standard of living as a free, democratic country; I was required to promise to abide by these values. As such, I was all the more shocked by yesterday’s announcement that the Australian government will move ahead with its ill-advised (and highly protested) plan to instill mandatory Internet filtering.

From a post I wrote a few months ago:

Don’t get me wrong, I am by no means in support of the sort of content that the ACMA seeks to repress (I think we’d all be a little better off without ‘Two Girls, One Cup’), but the idea of filtering the filth from the Internet is a perilously slippery slope. For one, you have to question how effective it would actually be, particularly because the content this aims to block is generally traded in underground forums and P2P rather than in public sites. And what about the margin of error? This certainly runs the risk of wrongly blocking sites – which is nothing less than a death sentence for a startup or small business.

But let’s be real here, it’s ascendancy not efficacy that’s the more problematic issue. Reporters Without Borders, an international organization that advocates freedom of the press, classified Burma, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam as ‘Enemies of the Internet’ for having “transformed their Internet into an Intranet in order to prevent their population from accessing ‘undesirable’ online information.” Australia is currently ‘under surveillance’ by the organization and if the mandatory filter is implemented, it will be the first western democratic country to have done so… I guess they could probably use a bill of rights about now.

How sickeningly ironic that Communications Minister Stephen Conroy made this announcement December 15th, which marks the 218th anniversary of the passage of the US Bill of Rights.

David Braue wrote on ZDNET that he believes the drastic change to ISPs scope of work is the biggest damage inflicted by the filter. Now, ISPs are legally obligated to filter Refused Classification content – and to offer, as Conroy put it, “optional filtering … to block additional content as requested by households”. That’s a whole new can of worms: if I want all web pages mentioning Pete Doherty, for example, banned, does that mean my ISP needs to give me my own custom feed? Furthermore, it sets a dangerous precedent for holding ISPs responsible for their users’ content – impeccable timing when you consider the ongoing court case between the recording industry and iiNet.

‘No worries’ doesn’t quite placate this one.